I'm trying to xor 2 binaries using python like this but my output is not in binary
any help?
a = "11011111101100110110011001011101000"
b = "11001011101100111000011100001100001"
y = int(a) ^ int(b)
print y
a="11011111101100110110011001011101000"
b="11001011101100111000011100001100001"
y=int(a,2) ^ int(b,2)
print('{0:b}'.format(y))
To get the Xor'd binary to the same length, as per the OP's request, do the following:
a = "11011111101100110110011001011101000"
b = "11001011101100111000011100001100001"
y = int(a, 2)^int(b,2)
print bin(y)[2:].zfill(len(a))
[output: 00010100000000001110000101010001001]
Convert the binary strings to an integer base 2, then XOR, then bin() and then skip the first two characters, 0b, hence the bin(y0)[2:].
After that, just zfill to the length - len(a), for this case.
Cheers
Since you are trying to carryout XOR on the same length binaries, the following should work just fine:
c=[str(int(a[i])^int(b[i])) for i in range(len(a))]
c=''.join(c)
You can avoid the formatting altogether.
Since you are starting with strings and want a string result, you may find this interesting but it only works if they are the same length.
y = ''.join('0' if i == j else '1' for i, j in zip(a,b))
If they might be different lengths you can do:
y = ''.join('0' if i == j else '1' for i, j in zip(a[::-1],b[::-1])[::-1])
y = a[len(y):] + b[len(y):] + y
The calculation of the integer part of the square root of a number can be done by trial and error, starting from 1, by executing the square until the result is less than or equal to the starting value of which is calculated by the root.
The following program returns the integer part of the root
def radice(x):
z = 0
t = 0
while True:
t = z*z
if t > x:
z -= 1
return z
z += 1
radice(17) // 4
Will be possible to write it without using functions and break?
Here is my code witout function but I dont' know how to write the same algo with no break
z = 0
t = 0
while True:
t = z*z
if t > x:
z -= 1
break
z += 1
print 'The integer part of the root is: ', z
This should suffice:
>>> int(17**0.5)
4
17**0.5 generates the square root of 17, and int basically removes the decimals, leaving you with the "integer part of the root".
Without using any functions, and if you want an integer result, complex code (like your own) is needed. However, if a float will do, then you could try this:
>>> (17**0.5)//1
4.0
This essentially does the same as the int call, but will return a float if either side is a float.
As you said the integer part of the square root of a number can be done by trial and error, starting from 1, by executing the square until the result is less than or equal to the starting value of which is calculated by the root.
Said that you can write the code without using function and break statements; here is the code:
n = input("insert a number: ")
r = 1
while (r * r <= n):
r = r + 1
print "the result is:", r -1
Parens are for clarity, not required
>>> (17**.5)-(17**.5)%1
4.0
Ok, let's think logically.
You cannot use break, so the only way to get out of the while loop is to break its condition.
If it's True, it cannot be broken, so we have to think about the proper condition to stop iterating. And this condition is already used in your algorithm: you exit when t > x, or z * z > x. So the condition to continue iteration should be the opposite, i.e. z * z <= x. And we have this simple solution.
x = 17
z = 0
while z * z <= x:
z += 1
print 'The integer part of the root is: ', z - 1
As a general rule, try to shy away from those while True: loops. While they are sometimes useful, they're generally harder to read and understand, this is probably why your teacher limits the use of break. The function was prohibited probably because return is just another way of escaping the loop. But those are exceptional: the normal way to end a loop is to break its condition, so this is how it should be written.
How does one round a number UP in Python?
I tried round(number) but it rounds the number down. Example:
round(2.3) = 2.0
and not 3, as I would like.
The I tried int(number + .5) but it round the number down again! Example:
int(2.3 + .5) = 2
The math.ceil (ceiling) function returns the smallest integer higher or equal to x.
For Python 3:
import math
print(math.ceil(4.2))
For Python 2:
import math
print(int(math.ceil(4.2)))
I know this answer is for a question from a while back, but if you don't want to import math and you just want to round up, this works for me.
>>> int(21 / 5)
4
>>> int(21 / 5) + (21 % 5 > 0)
5
The first part becomes 4 and the second part evaluates to "True" if there is a remainder, which in addition True = 1; False = 0. So if there is no remainder, then it stays the same integer, but if there is a remainder it adds 1.
If working with integers, one way of rounding up is to take advantage of the fact that // rounds down: Just do the division on the negative number, then negate the answer. No import, floating point, or conditional needed.
rounded_up = -(-numerator // denominator)
For example:
>>> print(-(-101 // 5))
21
Interesting Python 2.x issue to keep in mind:
>>> import math
>>> math.ceil(4500/1000)
4.0
>>> math.ceil(4500/1000.0)
5.0
The problem is that dividing two ints in python produces another int and that's truncated before the ceiling call. You have to make one value a float (or cast) to get a correct result.
In javascript, the exact same code produces a different result:
console.log(Math.ceil(4500/1000));
5
You might also like numpy:
>>> import numpy as np
>>> np.ceil(2.3)
3.0
I'm not saying it's better than math, but if you were already using numpy for other purposes, you can keep your code consistent.
Anyway, just a detail I came across. I use numpy a lot and was surprised it didn't get mentioned, but of course the accepted answer works perfectly fine.
Use math.ceil to round up:
>>> import math
>>> math.ceil(5.4)
6.0
NOTE: The input should be float.
If you need an integer, call int to convert it:
>>> int(math.ceil(5.4))
6
BTW, use math.floor to round down and round to round to nearest integer.
>>> math.floor(4.4), math.floor(4.5), math.floor(5.4), math.floor(5.5)
(4.0, 4.0, 5.0, 5.0)
>>> round(4.4), round(4.5), round(5.4), round(5.5)
(4.0, 5.0, 5.0, 6.0)
>>> math.ceil(4.4), math.ceil(4.5), math.ceil(5.4), math.ceil(5.5)
(5.0, 5.0, 6.0, 6.0)
I am surprised nobody suggested
(numerator + denominator - 1) // denominator
for integer division with rounding up. Used to be the common way for C/C++/CUDA (cf. divup)
The syntax may not be as pythonic as one might like, but it is a powerful library.
https://docs.python.org/2/library/decimal.html
from decimal import *
print(int(Decimal(2.3).quantize(Decimal('1.'), rounding=ROUND_UP)))
For those who want to round up a / b and get integer:
Another variant using integer division is
def int_ceil(a, b):
return (a - 1) // b + 1
>>> int_ceil(19, 5)
4
>>> int_ceil(20, 5)
4
>>> int_ceil(21, 5)
5
Note: a and b must be non-negative integers
Here is a way using modulo and bool
n = 2.3
int(n) + bool(n%1)
Output:
3
Try this:
a = 211.0
print(int(a) + ((int(a) - a) != 0))
Be shure rounded value should be float
a = 8
b = 21
print math.ceil(a / b)
>>> 0
but
print math.ceil(float(a) / b)
>>> 1.0
The above answers are correct, however, importing the math module just for this one function usually feels like a bit of an overkill for me. Luckily, there is another way to do it:
g = 7/5
g = int(g) + (not g.is_integer())
True and False are interpreted as 1 and 0 in a statement involving numbers in python. g.is_interger() basically translates to g.has_no_decimal() or g == int(g). So the last statement in English reads round g down and add one if g has decimal.
In case anyone is looking to round up to a specific decimal place:
import math
def round_up(n, decimals=0):
multiplier = 10 ** decimals
return math.ceil(n * multiplier) / multiplier
Without importing math // using basic envionment:
a) method / class method
def ceil(fl):
return int(fl) + (1 if fl-int(fl) else 0)
def ceil(self, fl):
return int(fl) + (1 if fl-int(fl) else 0)
b) lambda:
ceil = lambda fl:int(fl)+(1 if fl-int(fl) else 0)
>>> def roundup(number):
... return round(number+.5)
>>> roundup(2.3)
3
>>> roundup(19.00000000001)
20
This function requires no modules.
x * -1 // 1 * -1
Confusing but it works: For x=7.1, you get 8.0. For x = -1.1, you get -1.0
No need to import a module.
For those who doesn't want to use import.
For a given list or any number:
x = [2, 2.1, 2.5, 3, 3.1, 3.5, 2.499,2.4999999999, 3.4999999,3.99999999999]
You must first evaluate if the number is equal to its integer, which always rounds down. If the result is True, you return the number, if is not, return the integer(number) + 1.
w = lambda x: x if x == int(x) else int(x)+1
[w(i) for i in z]
>>> [2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 3, 3, 4, 4]
Math logic:
If the number has decimal part: round_up - round_down == 1, always.
If the number doens't have decimal part: round_up - round_down == 0.
So:
round_up == x + round_down
With:
x == 1 if number != round_down
x == 0 if number == round_down
You are cutting the number in 2 parts, the integer and decimal. If decimal isn't 0, you add 1.
PS:I explained this in details since some comments above asked for that and I'm still noob here, so I can't comment.
If you don't want to import anything, you can always write your own simple function as:
def RoundUP(num):
if num== int(num):
return num
return int(num + 1)
To do it without any import:
>>> round_up = lambda num: int(num + 1) if int(num) != num else int(num)
>>> round_up(2.0)
2
>>> round_up(2.1)
3
I know this is from quite a while back, but I found a quite interesting answer, so here goes:
-round(-x-0.5)
This fixes the edges cases and works for both positive and negative numbers, and doesn't require any function import
Cheers
I'm surprised I haven't seen this answer yet round(x + 0.4999), so I'm going to put it down. Note that this works with any Python version. Changes made to the Python rounding scheme has made things difficult. See this post.
Without importing, I use:
def roundUp(num):
return round(num + 0.49)
testCases = list(x*0.1 for x in range(0, 50))
print(testCases)
for test in testCases:
print("{:5.2f} -> {:5.2f}".format(test, roundUp(test)))
Why this works
From the docs
For the built-in types supporting round(), values are rounded to the closest multiple of 10 to the power minus n; if two multiples are equally close, rounding is done toward the even choice
Therefore 2.5 gets rounded to 2 and 3.5 gets rounded to 4. If this was not the case then rounding up could be done by adding 0.5, but we want to avoid getting to the halfway point. So, if you add 0.4999 you will get close, but with enough margin to be rounded to what you would normally expect. Of course, this will fail if the x + 0.4999 is equal to [n].5000, but that is unlikely.
You could use round like this:
cost_per_person = round(150 / 2, 2)
You can use floor devision and add 1 to it.
2.3 // 2 + 1
when you operate 4500/1000 in python, result will be 4, because for default python asume as integer the result, logically:
4500/1000 = 4.5 --> int(4.5) = 4
and ceil of 4 obviouslly is 4
using 4500/1000.0 the result will be 4.5 and ceil of 4.5 --> 5
Using javascript you will recieve 4.5 as result of 4500/1000, because javascript asume only the result as "numeric type" and return a result directly as float
Good Luck!!
I think you are confusing the working mechanisms between int() and round().
int() always truncates the decimal numbers if a floating number is given; whereas round(), in case of 2.5 where 2 and 3 are both within equal distance from 2.5, Python returns whichever that is more away from the 0 point.
round(2.5) = 3
int(2.5) = 2
My share
I have tested print(-(-101 // 5)) = 21 given example above.
Now for rounding up:
101 * 19% = 19.19
I can not use ** so I spread the multiply to division:
(-(-101 //(1/0.19))) = 20
I'm basically a beginner at Python, but if you're just trying to round up instead of down why not do:
round(integer) + 1
I am trying to do integration in Python but whenever I key in a value my outputs always results in 0. What the reason?
E.g.:
def main():
eq_of_form()
value_of_a()
value_of_b()
value_of_c()
value_of_m()
value_of_n()
value_of_x()
area_under_graph()
def eq_of_form():
print "Eq of the form y = ax^m + bx^n + c " + ":"
def value_of_a():
return raw_input("Enter value for a \n")
def value_of_b():
return raw_input("Enter value for b \n")
def value_of_c():
return raw_input("Enter value for c \n")
def value_of_m():
return raw_input("Enter value for m \n")
def value_of_n():
return raw_input("Enter value for n \n")
def value_of_x():
return raw_input("Enter a value for x to find " +
"value of y and the gradient at that point \n " + "x = ")
def area_under_graph():
y = (int(value_of_a())*int(value_of_x())**(int(value_of_m())+1))/((int(value_of_m())+1))
// * 2nd part.This works for me(:
// + (int(value_of_b())) * (int(value_of_x())**
// (int(value_of_n())+1))/(int(value_of_n())+1) + ((int(value_of_c())*int(value_of_x())))
print y
main()
(* Note: the eq under the area_under_graph() function is only half of it because the other half kind of work so I did not post it:))
For the top code, I tried inputting the values here: (maybe you can try using the same(: )
a = 1
b = 2
c = 1
m = 2
n = 1
x = 1
I am supposed to get 7/3 which is 2.333, but I end up getting 2. The problem appears to lie in the first part of the eq.
Sorry for the newbie question.
Your code at the start is wrong. You need to assign your variables after you read the user input:
value_of_a()
should be:
a = value_of_a()
It is also unnecessary to write a separate function for inputting each variable. You could instead have a function that takes a parameter:
def get_user_value(name):
return raw_input("Enter value for %s\n" % name)
a = get_user_value("a")
b = get_user_value("b")
# etc..
But then you ignore all these values and read them again inside the area_under_curve() method. This is probably not what you intend to do. Furthermore inside this method you assume that all parameters are integers. If you are using Python 2.5 the division here is integer division:
m1/m2
This could return 0 when the result was actually supposed to be a non-integer like 0.125. You need to use floats instead of integers to do the calculation. You can do this in Python 2.5 using float(m). In Python 3.0 the division operator does what you want by default.
/ does Integer division in Python2, this means a/b is the biggest integer c with c*b <=a, so 7/3 is indeed 2. You want floats, so you need to use them .. replace all the int with float in your code.
You should probably take another look at functions too ... you code can be much much shorter :-)
In Python 2.x, dividing an integer by another integer results in an integer. Either use from __future__ import division, or turn one of the integers into a float by passing it to float().
The issue is that you're using integer arithmetic - see all those int calls you've got everywhere. Integer arithmetic (in Python 2.x) will only ever return integers, so you'll never get 2.33, only 2.
Use float() instead of int() and things should work.